1. The EU legislative framework for groundwater protection
against pollution and deterioration
Andreas Scheidleder (Federal Environment Agency - Austria)
Philippe Quevauviller European Commission, DG Environment)
Korsør, 15 September 2008

2. Diversity of regions Hydrogeological variations

3. Diversity of uses, aspirations, pressures and impacts

4. River Basin Management Need for system understanding
bio-physical system D R
societal system P P S S S I S
Base sketch from Meade (1996) and DPSIR from EEA

5. One coherent management frame for all water-related legislationX
IPPC
Directive 1996
Groundwater
Directive 1980
Priority
Substances
Directive
2008
Groundwater
2006
Floods
2007
Drinking
Water
Directive
1996 X
Surface Water
Directive 1975
Bathing
Water Directive
1976/2006 X
Dangerous
Substances
Directive 1976
WFD X
Sampling
and Analysis
Directive
1979 X
DS Daughter
Directives X X
Exchange of
Information
Decision 1977
Nitrates
Directive
1991 X X
Shellfish Water
Directive 1979
Urban
Waste Water
Directive 1991
Fishwater
Directive 1978
X repealed by 2007; X repealed by 2013; X repealed together with adoption of WFD Daughter Directive on Priority Substances

6. Water Framework Directive Key Elements
Water management based on River Basins
Protecting all waters (surface and groundwaters)
Covering all impacts on waters
Cross border co-operation in water management between countries and all involved parties
Pollution prevention and emission control – “combined approach“
Economic instruments - to promote prudent use of water; (Principle of cost recovery including environmental and resource costs and taking into account the polluter pays principle)
Mandatory public participation
‘Good Status’ to be achieved, as a rule, by 2015;
Clear deadlines
… and guided by an unprecedented cooperation on implementation.

7. GW management within River Basins
Management objective: Good groundwater status (chemical, quantity, trends) to be achieved by the end of 2015 (WFD)
One plan for each (~110) river basin in Europe;
River Basin Management Plan as main instrument for planning, reporting and evaluation of success;
Publication 2009, updates every 6 years;
Contents
Characteristics of river basin [2005];
Environmental and economic analysis [2005];
Monitoring network [2006];
Results of public participation [2009];
Programme of measures operational [2012];
Established environmental objectives [2015];
Review of technical specifications [2015]

8. About 110 national and international River Basins in Europe
(40 RBDs are international)
~17,000 GWB
~43% not at risk

9. WFD key elements Need for action
Adopted on
WFD key elements Need for action
River basin districts
Delineation water bodies
Characterisation of bodies
Analysis of pressures
and impacts
Classification of bodies ‘at risk’
Design of monitoring
programmes
Surveillance monitoring
Operational monitoring
6 years cycle / Review
RBMP
GOOD STATUS
OBJECTIVE
Programmes of
measures

10. GWB delineation WFD - Definition
‘Body of groundwater’ a distinct volume of groundwater within an aquifer or aquifers = management unit
‘Groundwater’ all water, which is below the surface of the ground in the saturated zone and in direct contact with the ground or subsoil.
‘Aquifer’ subsurface layer or layers of rock or other geological strata of sufficient porosity and permeability to allow either a significant flow of groundwater or the abstraction of significant quantities of groundwater.

11. GWB delineation Experiences
Groundwater body = Management Unit
For adequat description of status
For comparing to environmental objectives and
For implementing measures
Experience - Most Member States started with:
identification of geological and hydrogeological boundaries;
vulnerability maps, subsoil properties, risk potential, utilisation and protection need, economic importance and water management aspects
Aim to achieve efficient and practical management units considering administrative burden and financial efforts
Size depends on variation of characteristics and pressures
Grouping of bodies supports efficiency
An iterative and on-going process

12. GWB characterisation Annex II
Initial Characterisation
all Groundwater Bodies
pressures & impacts,
dependent aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems)
Further characterisation
Groundwater Bodies at risk – (Annex II, 2.2, 2.3)
Transboundary Groundwater Bodies – (Annex II, 2.3)
 Basis for Risk Assessment

13. Risk Assessment - Status assessment

14. The Conceptual Model/Understanding Key element for WFD implementation

15. homogeneity of layers (?) & distribution of contaminants

16. The Conceptual Model/Understanding Simple version

17. WFD monitoring requirements
Chemical Monitoring - groundwater
Surveillance Monitoring
all GW-bodies (at least every 6 years)
Operational Monitoring
all GW-bodies identified at risk (at least once per year)
Drinking Water Protected Areas
All GW-bodies with human consumption of groundwater
Quantitative Monitoring - groundwater
All GW-bodies

18. WFD Environmental objectives Groundwater
Quantity
balance between natural recharge and abstractions
Chemistry
No saline or other intrusion
Compliance with numerical quality standards (Art 17  GWD)
No diminution of ecosystems
Trends
Reversal of significant sustained upward trends (Art 17  GWD)

19. Groundwater issues tackled jointly by the WFD and the new GWD
Risks of pollution
from diffuse/point sources
Art. 5 WFD (“bodies at risk”)
Quality standards /
Thresholds
linked to chemical status
Art 4.1.b(ii) WFD
Identify and reverse significant and sustained upward trends
Art 4.1.b(iii) WFD
Prevent / Limit
Measures
Art 4.1.b(i) WFD
Run-off
Drinking water
Abstraction
Art. 7 WFD
Groundwater= natural resource to be protected against pollution and deterioration,
in particular for dependent ecosystems and for use in water supply (links with Article 7
of WFD about Drinking Water Protected Areas)

20. Groundwater Directive (2006/118/EC) Purpose (Article 1)
Establishes specific measures to prevent and control groundwater pollution responding to Article 17(1) and (2) of WFD, in particular:
Criteria for the assessment of good chemical status
Criteria for the identification and reversal of significant and sustained upward trends and the definition of starting points for trend reversals
Complements prevent/limit provisions of pollutants inputs contained in WFD and aims to prevent the deterioration of status of all bodies of groundwater

21. Definitions Article 2
Groundwater quality standards (not to be exceeded)
Threshold values: GW standards to be set by Member States at local, regional or national level
Significant and sustained upward trend: statistically and environmentally significant increase in pollutant concentrations for which trend reversal is deemed necessary
Inputs of pollutants into groundwater: direct or indirect pollutant introduction due to human activity
Background level: concentration/value corresponding to no or very minor anthropogenic alteration
Baseline level: concentration/value setting reference point for trend identification (reference years )

22. Good chemical status criteria Article 3
Risks of pollution from diffuse/point sources (urban, agriculture, industrial)
EU-wide Quality standards
Nitrates & pesticides
(more stringent TV if needed)
TV establishment at most appropriate level (local, regional, national), with account of impacts on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, human toxicology and ecotoxicology knowledge
Common methodology
Run-off
Drinking water
abstraction
Threshold values
for “risk” substances
set by MS (end 2008) – Transboundary coordination required
= WFD environmental objective
(besides quantitative status covered by WFD)

23. Good chemical status criteria Annex I, Annex II
EU-wide groundwater quality standards: Nitrates: 50 mg/l, Pesticides: 0.1 µg/l, and Total Pesticides: 0.5 µg/l
More stringent threshold values could be needed
Annex II
Guidelines for the establishment of threshold values
Minimum list of pollutants to be considered
Information to be provided

24. X – Threshold value: 8, 12, 14 µg/l (account of NBL + interactions)
– DW safeguard zone (DW standard of 10 µg/l): minimum treatment should apply = compliance to Art. 7(3) of WFD
AQUATIC
ECOSYSTEM
GROUNDWATER BODY= DWPA
DW safeguard zone
Threshold value: 14 µg/l X X X X X X X X X
TERRESTRIAL
ECOSYSTEM X X X
Threshold value: 8 µg/l X X X
aquatic
ECOSYSTEM
Threshold value: 12 µg/l

28. Trend identification and reversal (Article 5, Annex IV)
Summary to be reported
in RBMP (way trends have
been identified, reasons
for starting point for
trend reversal
Specific trend
Assessment for
Point source
pollution
Drinking water
abstraction
NBL % TV
Starting point for trend reversal as % of GW standard
or TV (depending on trend and associated risk)
Identification of statistically and environmentally significant upward trends in
Groundwater bodies at risk- Reversal of trends presenting a risk for associated
Ecosystems, human health or legitimate uses through the WFD Programme of Measures

29. Trend identification and reversal Elements

30. Trend (Reversal) Assessment Tests

32. Plumes assessment (Article 5.5)

33. Prevent or Limit Measures (Article 6)
Risks of pollution from diffuse/point sources (urban, agriculture, industrial)
Limitation of inputs of non-
hazardous pollutants, linked
to chemical status objectives
Prevention of inputs
of hazardous
substances
Run-off
Drinking water
abstraction
Based on WFD programmes of measures
Diffuse sources to be considered

34. River Basin Management Plan Programmes of Measures - 2009
Measures designed to
protect waters, control abstraction,
control point source discharges liable to cause pollution (permit, investigation),
prevent and control diffuse sources of pollution(prohibition, permit: based on investigations)
… in the form of
Basic measures (linked to effective implementation of parent legislation) and
Supplementary measures (e.g. different specific instruments, economic incentives, research, education etc
Periodic reviews of authorisations / registrations based on regular monitoring
Provisions for derogations

35. A complex policy and technical framework
Seveso,
IPPC
POLICY
Env. Impact assessment
INDUSTRY
AGRI-
CULTURE
POLICY
Birds,
Habitats
URBAN
SECTOR
DRINKING
WATER
POLICY
Drinking water
POLICY
Sewage sludge
landfill
POLICY
UWW,
CPD
POLICY
groundwater
POLICY
Pesticides,
Nitrates,
biocides
POLICY
Bathing water
POLICY
WFD

36. Basic measures linked to effective implementation of parent legislation
Directives
Prevent pollution
Quality targets
Protected areas
Monitoring
Measures
Nitrate x
Plant Protection
Biocides
IPPC
Landfill
Sewage Sludge
UWWT
……….. …
WFD/GWD

37. Support to implementation EC Working Groups
Water Directors
Steering of implementation process
Chair: Presidency, Co-chair: Commission
Strategic Co-ordination Group
Co-ordination of work programme
Chair: Commission
Stakeholders, NGO’s, Researchers, Experts, etc.
Art. 21 Committee
Working Group A
“Ecological Status”
Chair: JRC, DE and UK
Working Group D
“Reporting”
Chair: Commission, EEA and FR
"GIS” Expert Network
Working Group C
“Groundwater”
Chair: Commission and AT
“Chemical Monitoring”
Strategic Steering Group “WFD and Agriculture”
Chair: FR, UK and Commission
Strategic Steering Group “WFD and Hydromorphology”
Chair: DE, UK and Commission
Working Group E
“Priority Substances”
Drafting Group
“Objectives/Exemptions/Economics”
Chair: Commission and DK
Stakeholder Forum “Water Scarcity and Droughts”
Co- Chair: FR/ES/IT
Working Group F
“Floods”

38. Working Group C & Links

39. WG C Guidance Documents
CIS Guidance document N°15 on Groundwater Monitoring (adopted in December 2006)
CIS Guidance document N°16 on Groundwater in Drinking Water Protected Areas (adopted in June 2007)
CIS Guidance document N°17 on the application of the term “direct and indirect inputs” in the context of the Directive 2006/118/EC (adopted in June 2007)
Towards a guidance on Groundwater Chemical Status and Threshold Values (adopted by SCG Nov 2007)
under development…
(Merged) Guidance on the assessment of groundwater status and trends (currently drafted)
CIS Guidance on Land Use & Groundwater (currently drafted)

40. Conclusions & Perspectives
 Active multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary cooperation.
 Integration of different environmental policies
 Need for strengthened exchanges, sharing practices,
 Integration and communication of scientific progress should be streamlined and made effective towards end-users links to WISE and FP7 funding) – “Transfer platforms” are needed
Source: Ministry of the environment, Québec, Canada

41. European Commission, DG Environment
WISE
European Commission, DG Environment